I watched "Q&A" on Monday (11/06/2018) evening
with Bill Shorten answering questions from the
audience. It proved to be interesting - and some very
tough questions. Mr Shorten answered all of them.

Tony Jones the host told us that Mr Turnbull had
also been invited to be a future guest. It will be
interesting to see if Mr Turnbull will agree to it.
And turn up as the sole guest facing the audience.

I would find it even more interesting
- if all the representatives of the various parties
would appear on the panel together - Mr Shorten, Mr Turnbull,
Dr Di Natali, Pauline Hanson, and perhaps - Jacqui Lambie
representing the Independents.

Watching "Q&A" on Monday evening - it occurred to me -
that when we apply for certain jobs - we have to list
our qualifications and experience. What qualifications
should we expect our party leaders and possible leaders
of our country to have?

In other words -
what qualifications are important to you - that a leader
should have?

Your thoughts please?

Turnbull and Shorten could learn heaps from President Trump. He has actually done much of what he promised. A long time since any pollie has achieved so much in such a short period of time. He certainly puts America first. What a breath of fresh air.

runner,

You haven't told us what qualifications should a leader
have. Can you list some please? What is it about
Mr Trump that you admire so much?

Hi Foxy Trump tore up the Paris agreement He has acted on illegal immigration He has overseen the lowest African American unemployment ever He calls out the hypocrisy of the media He has learned from Englands total failure re Islamic Immigration Would you like me to continue. With all his flaws he has much more character and courage than Shorten and Turnbull put together.

runner,

Thank You for bothering to reply again.

I get the picture - and it is appreciated.

When you've got the time - could you tell us
what qualifications should our country's future
leader have?

runner,

I meant to add - that to me a leader must have
the skills to build a program of policies
linked to party values while appearing to the
widest possible section of the electorate.

I would prefer someone with ministerial experience.
Good communication skills are a must because leaders
have to find a way to convey what they stand for.
Must be a decent speaker and an engaging interviewee.

More later.

I fail at your logic Foxy, but I'm convinced you mean well.

I'm not trying to be trite with this answer either, but a leader should have the innate ability to slaughter humans, for advancement of National causes.

A good leader would be able to advance causes that
would be beneficial to all sides without having to
resort to violence or the slaughter of people.
Therefore gaining exposure to foreign cultures
would be an important component of a leader's range
of experiences as well as the ability to respond to
unexpected crises.

The way Shorten has been sucking up to the ABC lately I would not be surprised if someone gave him a copy of the questions that were going to be asked.

Stack the audience with people easily done.

Honestly it's hard to measure a leader until they fill the position. Aside from personality and getting along with him (or her) as well as policies that you agree with, there are qualities you hope a leader to have that you can't really know until they take their place as a leader.

For example reading the book "The Darkest Hour," tells about Churchill as he took office, his life career and mistakes before taking office, and then gets into it as WWII became a reality. In hindsight most people would probably say Churchill was the kind of leader that was needed. But before hand, based on his track record, who would have known.

We make decisions on leaders based on politics and policies. Promises, and how well they deal with interviews to vote for them. But when they take office, it's a different matter.

Qualities in a leader I would like.

•Resolve to continue on in spite of public opinion and media coverage.
•readiness to quickly supply the needs of the people when there is a disaster.
•loyalty and reliability towards the nation they serve to lead.
•sticking to the promises given, instead of just showing attempts of trying for the appearance of it.
•A person of faith who seeks God. Because I think the tasks of being a county's leader are greater then expected. So having God there in my opinion should both steady the person, and curb future corruption.
•and finally after giving them a short amount of time to test their merit (at least 6 months). A good track record both domestic issues as well as international issues.

A leader should have passion, he/she should want the job to bring about better out comes not for personal gain,that leader should have a life long plan to reform and leave office in a better condition than they found it, the leaders loyalty should be to the party and its followers not a FACTION we can only hope great reformers are found.

My idea of a leader's qualifications is;
Integrity,
Care,
Compassion,
Pragmatism,
Or in a nutshell, not a Lawyer/Academic,

Honesty.

Someone who goes into politics to make changes.
To make a difference. Someone who's interested in
social reforms. Someone who's a high achiever.
Someone who's capable of rational thought.

Someone who's not a seat warmer, a hack, a careerist,
or at worst - an adventurer. Someone who cares about
what's good for the country and its people.

Where do we find such a titan?

Whatever qualities a true leader should have we ain't got.
A true leader doesn't kissarse whatever the circumstances and comports himself with a degree of dignity that invokes a sense of pride, and not embarrassment, from those that are expecting to being led in the right direction for all.
Political defiance gives cause for pride whereas compliance is seen as a form of subservience, with the right and wrong of it is inconsequential at that point in time
A potential leader is recognised by the masses and the only thing that lets them down is their conduct.
Shorten is not a leader, he's merely the next one in line at the trough with Turnbull simply considered better than nothing....but not by much.
Abbott after having performed so hard through the years came to realise that the top job requires eyes in the back of your head, a modicum of propriety and the ability to recognise political and public taboos, a little too late.
What we have at present are well meaning naive BoBos, buffoons and sleazes, leading a country that has no idea where it's at in the scheme of things.
The smart know to stay out of politics after having witnessed the Howard /Costello and the Hawke /Keating fiascos and not being able to purchase a coat with steel reinforcement in the back lining that could be worn comfortably.

Where do we find such a titan?
Foxy,
As I said, definitely not amongst Lawyers & Academics !

Firstly what you don't want.

You don't want;

1/ a lawyer, as they are trained to lie very well.

2/ an economist, as they have an uncanny ability to get it wrong.

3/ an orator, or you get an Obama a Turnbull or a Rudd, an empty talking head.

4/ Someone with passion, or you get a Whitlam.

5/ Someone who wants to make changes, see Whitlam.

6/ any one who has studied the humanities at uni, as they will have been brainwashed totally.

7/ Any professional politician.

What you need.

1/ Someone with a lot of business experience, so they can manage.

2/ Someone who wants to manage the country, not peoples heads & hearts.

3/ Someone not a complete egotist.

4/ Someone who will get out of the way of business & simply set the scene for industry to grow to provide wealth & employment.

5/ someone with a sharp knife to cut red tape.

6/ someone who doesn't think they know it all, & are opening to listening.

7/ Some one like Howard. Hang on, he was a professional politician, so who knows what we need.

What we do need is the voters bullsh#t detectors turned on, so we never get another Whitlam, Turnbull or Rudd.

Now the smoke's cleared, what was wrong with Rudd as leader?

Dear Aidan,

Rudd couldn't tolerate idiots.

thanks for your patience Hasbeen. Rational discussion can't be tolerated by haters.

Well in truth best hope Hasbeen is in the toilet when the leader is picked, Whitlam Rudd, Hawk, Kieting, Howard, Menzies, all held at least for a time, the electorate in their hands, all had what it took, for at least a while, we need another one of them, each had those voters behind them, well before an election confirmed it, as our media becomes more news creating than reporting, in my view the next leader needs to CONFRONT questioners with these words,* are you asking me my opinion or giving us yours*?

His ego.

Rudd thought he knew everything.

He never did the necessary study or evaluation of anything just went with his "superior" gut feeling.

That he got most things totally wrong proves he had constant indigestion, as well as plugs in his ears.

Some of you guys certainly have a sense of humour.
Good on you.

I've just found another link that listed the characteristics
of a good leader. They sound almost impossible for anybody
to have all of them - here goes:

Honesty and integrity

Confidence

Inspire others

Commitment and passion

Good communicator

Decision-making capabilities

Accountability (the buck stops here)

Delegation and Empowerment (you can't do everything)

Creativity and Innovation (latest buzz words for so many)

Empathy (not a dictatorial style).

http://blog.taskque.com/characteristics-good-leaders/

If you want regress go for Rudd, if you want progress hope someone with sense comes along very soon.

//If you want regress go for Rudd, if you want progress hope someone with sense comes along very soon.//

Umm... Rudd hasn't been in Parliament for about 5 years now.

Are you feeling OK, mate?

the first and foremost quality of a PM should be to put their nation first. Trudea is turning Canada into a putried mess with laws preventing free speach except for hezbollah supporters, Merkel puts illegals before young German girls and Turnbull puts the UN before Australia. Yeah Trump looks better every minute. Shorten politizes the abuse of young INdigeneous kids for his own purpose. Yep Australia really lacks a man of character. The closest they had for a long time was Abbott however the regressives at the abc/fairfax/turnbull ensured he was backstabbed.

Dear Foxy,

Qualities for a leader – not necessarily in the order listed:

1. Honesty, courtesy, kindness, compassion and eloquence
2. Ability to inspire
3. Ability to listen to and work with people having different opinions including subordinates
4. Ability to delegate
5. Scientific literacy
6. Knowledge of the humanities and history
7. Scepticism toward all religions and ideologies coupled with an understanding of why people have those beliefs
8. Ability to change opinion on receipt of new information
9. Mental and physical toughness

In my view Foxy a leader should have had his her hands dirty, as the best supermarket managers are usually those who started as a trolley pusher and worked their way up.

I have a saying that goes, "easy to say when you're on $300K".

What it essentially means is that when on $300K, very little in the way of living expenses bothers you, because let's face it, if power, fuel, even water charges increase, at worst, it would cut into your spending money.

So the main problem we have now is that most politicians have not cut their teeth on the ground so as to say, whereas back in the Joe days for example, most politicians were farmers or workers who wanted to make a difference, where as now few ever really do a hard days work on the ground, so have no real idea of the daily issues faced by the Joe average they claim to be working for.

So to me we need leaders who have come from life experience backgrounds, not the bunch of incompetents who most of would not know the cost of basics like milk and bread.

great list davidf

problem is that Jesus Christ is the only qualifier. Yep He is still alive but not here on earth at the moment.

Dear runner,

Jesus wouldn't qualify as a leader. Jesus told his disciples, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6).

I don't think anyone who would make such an arrogant statement is qualified to be a leader. That quote indicates that it doesn't matter how good a life you led or what a good person you are you must believe him. I wouldn't trust anyone who would make such a statement.

In the end we must look at what far too many voters want in a leader not what we, who seem to understand far more about the subject want, they want a media driven type, one the media will like and not instantly try digging up non existent dirt on,one too afraid of falling polls to do very much other than what big money and media agrees with, voters however are about to prove that did not work by removing Turnbull

Hi David f, just out of interest who would you think fits your criteria?

Dear runner,

I can't think of anybody who fits those criteria. It's sometimes a matter of luck. Neither Winston Churchill nor Franklin Roosevelt had a sterling life before they became leaders of their countries, but they performed very well as leaders.

We can consider Herbert Hoover. He was an engineer, a good organiser and a man of great compassion. He was involved in engineering projects over the world and was certainly scientifically knowledgeable. After the devastation of WW1 he organised relief agencies to help those affected by the slaughter. He seemed to be eminently qualified and was elected president. He turned out to be one of the worst presidents that the US has ever had.

Churchill and Roosevelt rose to the occasion, but Hoover couldn't cope. I don't think anybody could have predicted the results of any of them beforehand.

Dear rehctub,

You got your hands dirty and lived an honest life as a butcher.

You wrote, "In my view Foxy a leader should have had his her hands dirty, as the best supermarket managers are usually those who started as a trolley pusher and worked their way up."

Neither Roosevelt nor Churchill did an honest day's work in their lives, but they both turned out to be great leaders. They would possibly have been poor supermarket managers.

david f

I wonder how any leader of yesteryear would match up against a 24/7 media cycle. Sometimes I think its easier to idolise those who never faced the same scrunity.

The Commander stands for the virtues of wisdom, sincerely, benevolence, courage and strictness. Sun Tzu - The Art Of War

ANY on my list would do right now, every one of them for a while had voters on side, we have little choice, it is about to be Bill Shorten, he may again become the brilliant young man he once was and be the one I at least have waited for, yes I included Howard, personal dislike is no reason to over look truth, until work choices he owned his office

David F, with all due respect, you're referring to a heavily male dominated era. I'm afraid we live in a while new world now and the likes of these two gentlemen would not last a day in the modern day snake pit.

My god, apart from gay marriage, the next most important issue seems to be how many women we have in the ministries. Not that I'm sexist, but it's a fact. Sorry, but those days are a distant memory, locked away in history, never to be revisited.

Dear rehctub,

How many women do we currently have in our Parliament
that you think would be even considered for the top job?
None, I would hazard a guess. It's still a boy's club
as far as I can tell.

Dear rehctub,

When you prefix a sentence with 'Not that I'm sexist' that's a pretty good indication that you're sexist. In recent years we have had an increasing number of female presidents and prime ministers. They seem to be as good or as bad as male prime ministers.

In 1960 Sirimavo Bandaranaike became prime minister of Sri Lanka. She was the first female head of government.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_elected_and_appointed_female_heads_of_state_and_government lists female heads of government. There will be more.

Last year my wife had a fall which resulted in a hematoma. The neurosurgeon who saved her life was a woman. I am proud of my granddaughter who is going to medical school.

Leave it to the Taliban to be against education for girls. I think it is an important issue of how many women we have in the ministry or in any walk of life that does not depend on the sex of the person who is doing the job. Why waste the brains of half the population?

Are you feeling OK, mate?
Toni lavis,
This is too serious a topic to try & make sick jokes about it. I mean Rudd? Leave him for a light-hearted topic.

//I mean Rudd?//

Still hasn't been an MP since late 2013. I'm failing to see what you're getting so worked up about.

davd and Foxy, personally I couldn't care how many women are in any amount of roles, although I must admit I do have issues with women on the front line of heavy combat.

As far as female leaders go, I recall Margie Thacher and the NZ pm were amazing, but they were also tough cookies.

As for locally, we have had a few here but none have impressed me, but I guess i'm using history as a gage.

Foxy, I would have said Julie Bishop was a shoe in, but of late she suffers badly from a lack of respect for the dwindling tax dollars and still seems to spend like a drunken sailor. In fact, my bet is she will be dumped at the next election, if not from her seat, at least from her opp parties front bench because she has lost the trust of the people who she claims to be representing. You will note is said 'opp', because it would take a minor miracle for this mob to get back in, unless of cause the libs grow some balls and dump Turnbull.

On the matter of wasted tax dollars. With the advancement in technology, driven by the internet, is it really necessary to make frequent trips to far away countries to have pow wows and waste millions in the process.

Of cause we have farmers, particularly in NSW loosing their livelihoods, and sadly, their lives in some cases because of lack of funding, and care factor, while the likes of Ms Bishop is a frequent flyer (1st class no doubt) wasting money that could well be assisting our own. But hey, the modern day life of a politician seems to be all about what I call meisum, what's in it for me.

And david, you are welcome to think I am sexist, as it's your right to have an opinion, especially on this site, however I know i'm not and as you will have seen over the years I may be stubborn at times, but i'm also the first to admit when I get it wrong.

Dear rehctub,

You wrote: "but i'm also the first to admit when I get it wrong."

When did you get it wrong? When did you admit you got it wrong?

Now the smoke's cleared, what was wrong with Rudd as leader?
Toni lavis,
I was referring to Aidan's post when you jumped on the bandwagon without a ticket.
MP no longer or not did not come into the equation. Rudd was & more likely than not still is a dud that ruined many of Australia's positive prospects.

Canem Malum,

I liked your quote from Sun Tzu.

Here's another one:

"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy
without fighting."

Whether the US has succeeded currently in this latest
attempt, remains to be seen. Or perhaps the advantage
is North Korea's?

Time will tell.

david, nothing comes to mind straight away, but there have been times when I was wrong, and I openly admitted it.
As this is an 'opinion forum' you are welcome to either believe me, or form your own opinion. Either way it won't bother me.

Individual- Rudd was good till back flipping on "Small Australia" to "Big Australia" after the election. Sadly the Labor party is no longer the party of the seventies- and allowed its policy to be hijacked.

Foxy - yes Sun Tzu has one of the best descriptions of leadership I've seen - thanks for your feedback. I'm sure many could take note of the "win without fighting" strategy- but as Machiavelli says a prince needs to be willing to take the battle to the enemy. The Art Of War can be used more broadly than just for war - the Thomas Cleary translation gives the example of the family of doctors in the forward. Napoleon had one of the earliest western translations. It's required reading for officers in the military - but I, like yourself I'm sure, just like reading good books. The are many other other sources of good material on leadership- The Republic, The Prince, The Book Of Worldly Wisdom, Roman writers such as Gibbon, etc. As "Will Hunting" says - the old books are the best- they blow your hair back! Historical figures such as Monash, Attaturk, Medici's, Roman's, Greek's give insight into leadership. But your question was what are the most important attributes for a leader? In democracy, such as Australia, probably a capable population literate in history and strategy that is able to recognise good leadership and choose them.
The leader is not isolated from the culture/ community, their faction, their social grouping, their benefactors, etc- we get the leaders we deserve!
Many believe that it's impossible for a member of a population to choose good leadership in the modern mass culture world because the requirements of a good leadership is far removed from common experience. Confucius talked about the hierarchy of society being modeled on the family as a touchstone. Desmond Morris - "The Human Zoo" also talked about mass society. Some of us believe it's probably possible to use the formal hierarchy to choose good leaders in a "mass culture" by a bubble approach. There is no vacuum in politics!

North Korea is tricky.

"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting."
Foxy,
Does that mean you're supporting PC & the invasion of Europe & Australia next by Islam ?

Canem Malum,

It isn't easy choosing the traits that make for a
good leader because the kind of leadership
required in a military battle or the aftermath of an
earthquake may call for different qualities, and different
people, than the kind of leadership required at a
corporation board meeting or a political convention.

Style of leadership may be one of three basic kinds:
authoritarian, in which the leader simply gives orders
(Putin comes to mind); democratic, in which the leader
attempts to win a consensus on a course of action (Turnbull
comes to mind), and laissez-faire, in which the leader is
easygoing and makes little attempt to direct or organize
the group. (Clive Palmer comes to mind).

In Australia, at least, the leaders who seem to be most
effective in holding small groups together and seeing that
they accomplish their tasks tend to be democratic.
Authoritarian leaders as we've seen are much less effective,
because the work of the group becomes bogged down internal
conflicts. Laissez-faire leaders are usually ineffective
for the group lacks directives and tackles problems in
a haphazard way.

This doesn't mean, however, that democratic leadership is
the most effective in all situations. An authoritarian leader,
for example is more effective in emergency situations, where
speed and efficiency outweigh other considerations. For this
reason, leadership in armies, police forces, and hospital
emergency rooms is typically authoritarian.

Democratic leaders are more effective in situations where group
members are concerned about individual rights or where there
is disagreement over goals.

However, research on Australian subjects
who have been socialised to
react negatively to authoritarian leaders, cannot be
automatically generalised in cultures in which authoritarian
leadership is expected and in which there is virtually
no experience of democratic decision making.

As an ALP member I am aware we no longer are the party some want us to be, our win in 1972 came after Charlie Oliver, head of the AWU gave the big fella PERMISSION! to run for the leadership! head of a union, we moved, started the long trek towards the voters not away from them, as shown in the 23 years in the wilderness,Bob and Paul continued that move, right of our last position, we never stopped following the voters wishes, no victory in Australia for a true party of the left only,so wave good by to the lights on the hill, they shine now in that workers grandsons third rental home,Labor actively seeks the middle ground, while its opponent slips further to the right and leaves Menzies blue collar workers in its wake,what we need right now is another reforming ALP leader

Dear Belly,

What do you think of Chris Bowen?

very impressed with him Foxy, he will one day lead the party,not just yet but he will, changing the government, here and in America, will help stall the drift to the right,coming trade war will too

http://barenakedislam.com/2016/07/27/four-stages-of-islamic-conquest-what-stage-has-your-country-reached-now/

Foxy,
Does this link concur with your philosophy regarding your previous post on the supreme Art of war?

individual,

"Bare Naked Islam" is a news and opinion website with
an EXTREME right-wing bias.

This source promoted EXTREME Islamophobia and is
classified as an Anti-Islam hate group.

Further this source has a poor record with fact-checking.
It is a very unreliable hate group.

There's enough hatred in the world. You don't need to add
to it.

Shame on you!

Foxy,
instead of spitting the dummy how about answering the questions put into your inconvenient truths basket ?

I do not give a platform to hate speech.

Well said Foxy however some times the uniformed nature of comments points not to hate but total lack of ability to see the truth. back on subject we can not over look despite those who have, my list of former PM s held the electorate for some time in each of their hands, perhaps world politics will recover let us hope so, but right now the statesmen leaders seem to be in France and Canada,maybe if she can hold on, Germany

Foxy,
That's a pretty rich coming fom someone who does not consider open hostility i.e. open talk of taking over the world as hateful but questioning those kind of quotations is Hate Speech ?
I think you're on the verge of losing it old girl. Instead of replying with such hypocritical rhectoric you should concentrate on the recovery of some tolerance & integrity.

Dear individual,

The following is found in the Bible:

“Because of this, God greatly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, of those in Heaven and on earth and under the earth” (Philippians 2.9-10)

One could take it to mean that Christians want to take over the world. I am sure some Christians think so. However, I think most Christians have no desire to take over the world and want to live in peace with people who don’t share their faith . However, if someone wanted to make non-Christians hate and fear Christians they would find Christians who expressed those and similar views and scare the pants off of non-Christians by creating a website quoting Christians who agreed with the above. That website would be a hate Christians website in the same way that website you cite is a hate Muslims website.

davidf,
the website was simply a random pick of what was on Google when I clicked Islamic quotes. I didn't pick & choose.
Anyhow, I simply wanted an answer to the quote of the Art of the supreme War but all I got was being accused of hate speech.
In my book two wrongs don't make a right.
Islam is spreading rapidly at the expense of the host countries in every which way & that is varifiable fact & quoting & stating fact is not the kind of speech I am accused of. The accusation totally lacked reason & logic.

Dear individual,

I agree with Foxy that the site you cited is a hate site. All you are being accused of is not recognizing the nature of the site. Both Christianity and Islam are missionary religions. Missionary religions want to spread and have had a great deal of success in spreading.

I see no more reason to be afraid of Islam than to be afraid of Christianity. With the exception of Turkey and Afghanistan a century ago all Islamic countries were under Christian control. The Christian expansion was not peaceful. Now the pendulum has swung, and most Islamic countries are free of Christian control. When the Islamic countries were under Christian control the Christian imperialist powers had no hesitation about sending missionaries in to change the people's religion. Just as some Christians would like all the world to follow their religion some Muslims would like all the world to follow their religion. Neither will happen.

Sometimes, the efforts of the missionaries and the armies were to get the occupied peoples to change from one brand of Christianity to another. Such was the case in the Philippine-American War starting 1898 when President McKinley stated he wanted to Christianize the Filipinos who were mainly Catholic. Apparently, he thought Catholics weren't real Christians.

davidf,
from my personal experiences I can say that there's one lot more dangerous than religious zealots & that's the hordes of half-baked, pseudo intellectuals otherwise commonly classifying themselves as Academics. They're commonly found in State-funded media, the Public service & public education, Arts & State-funded Sport or in much simpler terms, Leftists incapable of pulling their own weight. Tragically, this is the pool from which many political aspirants for the ALP & the Greens are scooped.
None of them will ever acquire the integrity & responsibilty the nation is expecting from them.
LNP have also scooped some of their candidates from the shallow end of the gene pool.

Dear individual,

I guess we see things so differently that further dialog seems pointless.

davidf,
I suppose indoctrination will always get in the way of problem analysis & with that it's back to standby.

Dear David F.,

I admire your patience.

But its a wise move to simply walk away from
some people. Debating some is - as another poster
on this forum advised me - sometimes is just
not worth the effort.

It's like playing chess with a pigeon.

The pigeon knocks the pieces over, craps on the board
and flies back to its flock to claim victory.

Individual- I just looked at the site briefly but I just saw some quotes from presumably well known people in the Islamic world. In order to be Hate Speech it generally requires incitement- I didn't see any on this site but maybe I didn't read enough- but some countries have widened this definition. Not sure if widening the definition is democratic. There appears to be some political hypotheses on the site which can be tested for accuracy. I can imagine that Identity theorists first action would be denial. Foxy and David F say it's a Hate site- I'm not sure that it fits the UN definition of a Hate Crime. So much apparently irrational aggression towards the site makes me think it's something I should read. :P

But I guess you're just giving a potential/ possible example of Foxy's quote "to win without fighting is best". I'm impressed- kudos.

I PROMISE! last time ever a mention of me leaving will come from my key board,it DID NOT come because of abuse, it came after repeated off topic trolling, but at that time, being the owner of a mirror, I had become more than aware I had been abusing people too.
In fact had been trying to stop it, do we understand it is pointless? that every single one of us can not be right all the time? most importantly, if you think you are never wrong, ever, you slam the door on any improvement can, if we wish, use less offensive ways to express doubts about others why not try it?

Well said belly, after all, this is an 'opinion' site and we are all entitled to our own opinion.

Having said that, there are posters who just will not accept fact, but hey, that's life. As an example, I see Islam as a potentially huge world problem, mainly because it is a movement and as such does not have a life span. I fear for the day when those who regard themselves as 'moderate Muslims' are given an ultimatum to choose which way they want to go, who they choose to follow. Hopefully I won't be around to see the result, should such a situation arise.

Canem Malum,

"Bare naked Islam" is classifed as an Anti-Islam hate
group. WordPress and Paypal have removed or suspended
this site citing its violent tone.

The Southern Poverty Law Center monitors hate groups and
other extremists throughout the US and exposes their
activities to law enforcement agencies. According to the
Southern Poverty Law Center this site promotes extremes
Islamophobia and is classified by them as a hate group.
Further this source has a poor record with fact-checking,
It is a very unreliable hate group. Only extremists
contribute to this site and equally only extremists would
support it.

http://mediabiasfactcheck.com/bare-naked-islam/

http://www.islamophobia.org/islamophobia-organisations/54-bare-naked-islam.html

cont'd ...

Excuse my typo - here's the site again:

http://www.islamophobia.org/islamophobic-organisations/54-bare-naked-islam.html

cont'd ...

stuffed up again.

Here's the link - one last try:

http://www.islamophobia.org/islamophobic-organizations/54-bare-naked-islam.html

Anyone who does not recognise "Bare Naked Islam" site as an
Anti-Islam hate group - has serious problems.

one only needs to read the Koran and look at the life of Mohammed to have an understanding of what Islam stands for. ON top of that travel to any Islamic country. Wake up Foxy, no amount of demonisation of people speaking truth can change the truth. Yes most Muslims are peace loving people. Islam like marxsim is very ugly and intolerant.

Dear runner,

Have you read the Koran?

David, such a silly question, of course runner has read the Koran, back to front. Unfortunately it was all in Arabic and he didn't understand a word, so now he's waiting for the "movie", aka 'Mohammad Meets Godzilla' to be released, hopefully with English sub titles for a better understanding of the A hole. The A hole in question being the Big M, which a reliable source down at the Christian Fellowship assures runner was indeed the case, no question about it.

Just back yesterday from NZ, attended a tangi (funeral) for a close cousin and friend, who incidentally was an Anglican Minister, his death drew about 2,000 mourners, from near and far, a well known and respected man, a very big tangi indeed. It shows two cultures can come together, with strict Maori protocol mixing with Christian belief. Seven Anglican Ministers conducted the final service at the 'urupa' (cemetery), very moving.

Dear Paul1405,

Have you noticed something odd lately on this forum.
A very strong smell of seaweed?

Some people have described it as a "breath of fresh air,"

To me its more like a rank wind from the ocean.

It doesn't go away.

Keeps coming back.

Considering that Christian powers were largely responsible for two horrible, destructive World Wars in the last century, considering that the Christian British used to boast that the sun never sets on the British Empire, an empire amassed by violence, and considering that Christian powers have landed in North America, South America, Africa and Australia without caring whether the people already there wanted them I think there is much more reason to be afraid of Christianity than there is to be afraid of Islam.

Dear David F.,

Beautifully put, as always.

Foxy- This is a little off topic... I've noted some here have to check their facts better too. I've even on occasion been known to get something wrong. It's the nature of the internet. But I assume you would have an example but you've said that you don't repeat hate speech. The organisations you've quoted don't have the authority to judge law so they are kangaroo courts- surely being a well read person you can come up with better sources if your argument has merit...

It's concerning that commercial entities such as Paypal are becoming political. It goes to the heart of the financial systems integrity.

Foxy said- "The Southern Poverty Law Center monitors hate groups"

Answer- I would say "The Southern Poverty Law Center monitors "suspected" hate groups". People are not guilty of Hate Crimes until they are convicted.
If the FBI felt that they were hate groups they would list them as a proscribed organisation. It's generally considered bad form in law to judge someone guilty by association. But some people are frustrated and so sometimes let their frustrations get them into trouble.

The "Southern Poverty Law Center"- Many don't appear to hold them in high regard from what I understand from previous reading. Just did a Wiki search couldn't find anything damning. Seems similar to the Anti Defamation League- who appears to be an Israeli front group. Sometimes it helps to understand these groups by checking their membership. At first glance this group is a vigilante law firm- that take advantage of the burden of proof differences between civil and criminal law. Perhaps someone needs to create a "Law Center for Free Speech". I'm uncertain if the SPLC is a Jewish lobby group but these lobbies appear to be very powerful in Hollywood and Washington and disproportionate to their representative population.

"Antifa" groups are apparently very aggressive... and are possibly breaking the law.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/18/us/unmasking-antifa-anti-fascists-hard-left/index.html
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/antifa-violence-ethical-author-explains-why-n796106 -Interview with Author and President "Southern Poverty Law Center".

Well thanks for that David. I never knew that Genghis Khan & the Ottoman Empire were Christian.

You learn something every day on OLO.

Canem Malum:

‘Seems similar to the Anti Defamation League- who appears to be an Israeli front group.’

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Defamation_League

The Anti-Defamation_League was founded in 1913 – 35 years before Israel existed.

David F said- "The Anti-Defamation_League was founded in 1913 – 35 years before Israel existed."

Answer- From your wiki article "The Anti-Defamation League (ADL; formerly known as the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith) is an international Jewish non-governmental organization"

In Australia it appears to be named the Anti Defamation Commission.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-04-18/brull---the-orwellian-anti-defamation-commission/3955260 -Israeli propaganda and the Anti-Defamation Commission

http://www.mycause.com.au/charity/1480/BnaiBrithAntiDefamationCommissionADC

https://newmatilda.com/2009/07/07/if-you-dont-agree-us-youre-antisemitic/ -New Matilda has two Jewish journalists from memory.

http://www.adl.org/israel-70 -On Israel's 70th birthday, ADL looks back with pride on our long time support for the Jewish state, and remains committed to working towards a secure, peaceful, Jewish and democratic state. We are inspired by what Israel has built and accomplished

The old chestnut again, all Muslims are evil, unless they are champion sportsmen or women who play for my team, truth is about at the least a thousand Muslims are murdered by Muslims for every other victim, and in truth more information all over the world about terrorism comes from other Muslims,hate is always blind

Hi David,

Other than those few minor indiscretions, world wars, invasion of continents, the destruction of millions, is there anything that you can put your finger on that indicates that Christians were anything other than peaceful god fearing folk? I ask, can you name any real big nastiest that they may have been responsible for.... like, um...ah...um..well, you know what I mean.

Canem Malum,

Most reasonable people would distance themselves from what they
see as hate-groups. And after reading what was on the
site of "Bare-Naked Islam," the conclusion was easy.
It was a hate-group site. They don't need to be convicted
of being guilty. That site does it so well for them.
One only has to read what's on it.

I found that the site reached such a pitch of Anti-Muslim
hysteria which came across as being put together by an irrational
person. Since then I have learned that the person responsible
for the site is someone - who's been described
as a total nut-job.

I believe that the site is run by "hate-groups."
You have only to read what's on there to see that.
And if you don't - that speaks volumes.

Canem Malum,

The Southern Poverty Law Center is considered authoritative
by academic and media sources. They provide information to
the FBI. The following link provides more information on
the work that they do:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Poverty_Law_Center

They do not break the law. They work with it.

Dear Canem Malum,

The fact remains that the Anti-Defamation League was founded 35 years before the state of Israel so they cannot be an Israeli front group even though they support Israel. An Israeli front group by the definition of a front group is a group that is established by Israel.

Since I support separation of religion and state I do not support Israel which has less separation of religion and state than Australia which gives taxpayer money to religious schools and has chaplains in the public schools.

Nevertheless the Anti-Defamation League is not an Israeli front group, and their support of Israel does not make them a front group.

David F Said- "The fact remains that the Anti-Defamation League was founded 35 years before the state of Israel so they cannot be an Israeli front group even though they support Israel. An Israeli front group by the definition of a front group is a group that is established by Israel."

Answer-

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Front_groups

Sourcewatch- Definition of Front Group

A front group is an organization that purports to represent one agenda while in reality it serves some other party or interest whose sponsorship is hidden or rarely mentioned. The front group is perhaps the most easily recognized use of the third party technique.
Of course, not all organizations engaged in manipulative efforts to shape public opinion can be classified as "front groups." For example, the now-defunct Tobacco Institute was highly deceptive, but it didn't hide the fact that it represented the tobacco industry.

Wikipedia- gives a definition similar to "David F"'s.

(When the media reports on the "Hate Groups" list the ADC, ADL produces rarely is there a mention that it explicitly suppports Israel. Anti-Defamation League would suggest that it is an organisation against Defamation but I would be surprised if it mentioned defamation by Jewish groups. I think the Jewish journalists at New Matilda mentioned just that point.)

Indi, good to see you are trying to propagate the thoughts of like minded people. You are known here by what you post, and you have posted a link to 'Bare Naked Islam' a hate group who condone violence towards what is mostly an innocent minority. When people start calling for "blood on their hands", and the "blowing up" of presumably innocent, men, women and children in Mosques, what other conclusion can be drawn.

You can always recant, and admit you made a mistake.

Dear Canem Malum,

If supporting Israel makes a group an Israeli front group then the Australian government and many Christian evangelical churches are also Israeli front groups. As to the Anti-Defamation League actions the league has engaged you are apparently better versed than I am.

Paul1405,
I didn't make a mistake, you're making one by thinking I'm an instigator by simply drawing attention to what's out there.
How could I know that that was a Hate Group site ? Tell me how to identify a hate group site & will most certainly only quote them when it is proper to do so.
How do I indentify a Leftist Hate group or a RIGHT one ? To call groups Hate groups is merely turning the pointer from yourself to others because you appear to be from a hate group that hates hate groups.
My old school buddies back in Europe see such sites as stark reality not Hate Speech.

individual,

You may not have known that it was a hate group - but
a few reads of what was on their site should have rung
some alarm bells. And further more now that it has been
pointed out to you - why are you still in denial and
not recanting? You have only yourself to blame for your
own behaviour.

Foxy,
I'm afraid I have to plead mea culpa for my ignorance but for all the money in the world I can't see what I've done or said wrong when i provided that link. I clicked on Islamic Quotes in Google & a hundred or more sites came up stating the same messages. If they're all Hate Speech sites shouldn't your disapproval be vented at Google instead of me ? I did not google Hate Speech, I googled Islamic Quotes.

Dear Individual,

Chill out.

I've already moved on.

//Tell me how to identify a hate group site//

Indy, just check the favorite "bookmarks" on your 'puter, and I'm sure you'll recognize them.

Foxy, will that do for a final answer for Indy? Maybe not.

Can any one help? just tell me if you can, how could Australia ever return to the white Australian one? world wide, maybe the powers that be? population integration has already taken place, who could stop it? if my view we can not is true are we better to hate each other or find ways to live together? here I put my sin on the table, I think every faith divides humanity, that no country ever should let any faith have any thing to do with government,and yes! I would send some home instantly, not race not faith but true idiots,200 years from now we may see humanity has learned to live together, let us hope so hate never works

Belly,
This is the question all the decent humans ask themselves all the time. Where does all this hate originate ? In my opinion hate is generated by self-centered people who would yearn for peace but on their terms only.
Most hate in Australia today stems from the "you owe me a living" groups who, instead of contributing to the Nation's coffers, are the #1 exploiters of the decent people who actually know that peace can only ever be cornered if everyone contributes. Now, who are these people who use but don't contribute ? Where do they get so indoctrinated with the gimme, gimme mentality ? When those who produce get sick & tired to keep the hangers-on with ever increasing fees & charges, they're branded Right Wing rednecks.
Well, better a red neck than their brown one ! Most decent people don't see the need for perpetual moral grand-standing whilst holding out their hands for more for nothing in return. Some are actually so absorbed in their own importance that hey actually believe that the rest of us owes them simply because they think they have intellect. Intellect is only of any worth if the intellectual can make use of it & not depend on others. My old mate, may he rest in peace, used to say "intellectuals are lagely ineffectuals". Now, how often do we get to hear such profoundly accurate assessment ?
This is why we need leaders who are intelligent & decent enough to see what's needed & not what the ignorant intellectual idealists think they see through their rose-coloured glasses.. Leaders are people who are not indoctrinated by elitist self-overrating & who don't depend on ego approval at every turn.

the world you see, and live in Indy is not one I can ever see,self interest is a problem, but just think if every one of us put ten dollars a week, in to helping others?

individual,

If you feel so strongly about things make
your vote count at the next election.
Or better still join a Party that you do
approve of and work towards getting them
elected. Actions speak louder than words.
And who knows you just may succeed in
getting what you want. But at least you'd
have done more than just winged and complained.

' Leaders are people who are not indoctrinated by elitist self-overrating & who don't depend on ego approval at every turn.'

well Individual that is why Trump is so successful and hated so much of the elitist swamp. Imagine we had him in charge of Indigeneous affairs in Australia. Instead of crying before the cameras and pouring millions more into corrupt organisations, I suspect he would diminish the child abuse, the corruption among agencies and the rewriting of history. Everyone would be better off except the victim industry and the professors making money out of lying.

join a Party that you do approve of and work towards getting them elected.
Foxy,
Sounds idealistic enough but reality throws a spanner in the works as usual. You see, the system of Government does not permit a voter to vote more than once, but in order for concerned voters to get their views through, they'd need to vote for two or thee parties & that as I said is not allowed under the guise of Democracy.
No one party addressess let alone sees fit to address the issues that would help more than just their supporters. That is the fundamental tunnel vision problem.
How many people voted to support their preferred party only to be let down time after time.
How many times do oppositions sabotage a Governments efforts to achieve something worthwhile ?
I think 95% of the nation's taxpayers would welcome tax reform but is it happening ? No! Why not ? Because a handful of greed mongers object. Very democratic indeed.
Should a politician with integrity ever enter politics he/she would be so victimised that they'd have no choice but give in to status quo by the status quo electorate.

runner,

Trump has the approval of 40 to 41% of the US population.
He has a disapproval rating of over 51%. Which means that
American are not all for him. They currently appear to be
a very divided nation. Is that what we really want here?
If you like the man so much why not consider moving over
there?

Trump has the approval of 40 to 41% of the US population.
Foxy,
That figure is obviously from a leftist Trump Hate site.

individual,

No its from CNN, BBC, LA Times, Reuters,
Washington Post, and others, including the Gallup Polls
and Pew Research.

I wasn't aware that there were any Trump "hate sites" as
such. Looking critically at the actions and policies
of a world leader is what journalists in a democracy are
supposed to do. However, things may be different in
Russia and North Korea.

Trump is a walking talking conspiracy, he is living proof some voters will fall for any thing, he has tried to build a wall, at another country's cost, went close to telling North Korea he intended a nuclear war, is about to rock world trade with what may well bring on the next GFC,yet his followers can as runner has, tell us opposition to him is? HATE

Trump is a marketing expert. He knows how to sell a product even though the product is shoddy. He sold himself. The segment of the public he aimed at was the most fundamentally religious and poorest educated. Their presence is a condemnation of the US educational system.

In General Grant’s Memoirs is the following:

“The Southern rebellion was largely the outgrowth of the Mexican war. Nations, like individuals, are punished for their transgressions. We got our punishment in the most sanguinary and expensive war of modern times.”

Grant regarded the Civil War as punishment for the Mexican War. What is Trump punishment for?

Aside from all the things Trump does is also that shaking-up of the the elitist establishment & don't they just hate it !
If nothing else, Trump has shown & is continuing to show that unless you change direction, nothing new with the prospect of positive change will ever happen. He is changing the frozen-in-place comfort zones of the no longer affordable academic elitist groups & haven't they gotten into panic mode?
In fact, this panic has brought out the utter ugliness that hangers-on are capable of when cornered & put on display. Normal folk are just tired of being fleeced by them & for them. Trump is merely hining at them to start pulling their own weight. Judging by the anti-Trump rhetoric here there are more than plenty Australians shacking in their boots.
Trump is a leader that does what should have been done years ago, he puts the wind up the non-productivee Leftists. Could Turnbull or Shorten grow the Gonads required ?

Individual- I hear what you are saying and generally I agree with your position. However it pains me to see you discussing these issues against those who just flick back socialist/ identity propaganda- when you are actually a person of intellectual integrity that thinks beyond cliche. My suggestion is talk with people with new ideas. Talk with people that are open to new ideas and try to contribute to balance in the public media- difficult when they have drunk the cool-aid- but that just means the mass media will hasten their demise. No one in the media supported Trump but he got elected- just shows the public media is not being recognised as a thought leader- probably because they don't have new ideas.

Individual,

You would reach more posters if you would stop
with the labelling of people. That action is
so yesterday. Most people today are neither
"left" or "right" except for the die-hards of
course. Anyway - try it and see if people's
reaction change towards what you are saying.
At the moment your message is being lost in the
labels.

Without question, the first qualification of any leader must be that they are truly for equality. On a dying planet, we can no longer afford to squander the brain-power of half the population. Science urgently needs thinkers.

Leaders like Trump and Putin, womanisers who have little respect for women and therefore, place less importance on issues that concern half the population, are testosterone-fuelled dinosaurs who are backward-thinking and will not utilise their peoples' full potential. It might seem like women have equal rights in those countries but we women know that they don't. World leaders need to fully support (in action - not just words) the basic human rights of ALL people so they can reach their full potential, or shouldn't be in positions of power. In an ideal world, potential leaders would sit for psychometric testing as most other employees now do, to ensure they won't rule with their egos and genitals rather than with emotional and intellectual intelligence. Humankind has experienced thousands of years of war caused by testosterone. We no longer have time for wars or chest-beating, we need to be smarter than that and utilise every able body of whatever persuasion, to fix the planet.

Canem Malum,
cheers for the advise, if only it had come a few moments earlier I could have prevented my last reply to our resident ridiculer of common sense & answer evader.
all the best

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used
against unintelligible comments.

(Thomas Jefferson - US President).

To someone less indoctrinated & not wearing rose-coloured glasses the 'unintelligible comments' do come across as concern & suggestions for solutions. Ridicule is the prime tool for those with no logical retort.
How can we ever expect to get real leaders when voters only get to chose candidates of Academic/Lawyer background?

Individual- No problems :)

Thomas Jefferson / Benjamin Franklin were interesting people both polymaths. The principles of the Declaration Of Independence can be applied widely I've found- even to items of Identity politics- I'm not sure that Emile Durkheim founder of SocSci would approve. As Einstein alluded to (not that he had a monopoly on wisdom) it's usually important to address the problem at a deeper level than the problem itself.

It may well highlight our current state of leadership but know this country for a time at least gave high polling to Bodgie Bob, Howard, and Kevin 07, true statement and it warns not to say we have always lacked leaders

Foxy said- "Individual, You would reach more posters if you would stop
with the labelling of people. That action is so yesterday. Most people today are neither "left" or "right" except for the die-hards of course. Anyway - try it and see if people's reaction change towards what you are saying. At the moment your message is being lost in the labels."

Answer- Another Identity politics concept- Sometimes it's necessary to classify label things in order to discuss them. Anyway see some links to "Labelling (Intersection) Theory criticism" below...

http://www.arasite.org/cwlabth.html
http://www.britannica.com/topic/labeling-theory
http://www.thoughtco.com/labeling-theory-3026627

Sounds "similar" to the Quantum Mechanics Measurement Problem.

Canem Malum,

A few points on labelling people.

If a person uses terms to describe people and
believes - that they cannot change - then their
life can be stressful. Therefore if they are able to
think about people's personalities in a less fixed
way, perhaps that would decrease their overall stress.

The belief that people can change has many benefits -
for example, students who believe their own behaviour
and performance can change work harder in school to
overcome academic difficulty. People who believe that
others can change are more likely to work with them to
regain trust after they have a bad experience.

Ultimately, it is therefore important to realize that
one should not completely define people by their
current behaviour.

Serving up names like some do is self defeating because most never in any way are as they are described, hard to take any one parroting the same terms over and again seriously however this thread has shown us not many have trust in our current contenders, voters will get it right as they mostly always do

I am incensed at the title or premise of the question.
Why?
Being a technical and pragmatic person, I refute the title because first and foremost, a country's Prime Minister is not a 'leader'.
He is simply the mouth piece, front man for the elected party/parties, (coalition).
HE, in my view, is just another poly like the rest.
He is chosen by the others to report the collectives views and decisions to the country or it's people.
He is not a dictator.
He is not a King.
He is not empowered to 'make decisions' he is part of a collective or group who collectively make decisions and decide outcomes, and therefore his singular opinions are irrelevant.
I expect that when he responds to questions with the 'I' think or 'I' believe or 'I' will do this or that, he is ingratiating himself or 'big noting' himself to a level of authority beyond his charter or purview.
As to the question and a more specific answer.
Look we all know the traits and foibles that are the qualifications of politicians.
What should a country's leader have?
Assuming the questioner means, 'What qualifications should a Prime Minister have'?
The two most important, in my view are 'reason and common sense'.
The evidence is overwhelming that ALL previous govt's have failed miserably in this area.
If a PM is to be a true 'leader', he must be able to bring these two factors to bear.
In doing so he will satisfy that sector of the population who want to see fair and honest outcomes for all concerned and not just satisfy the demands of select groups, minorities and lobbyists.

ALTRAV said- "In doing so he will satisfy that sector of the population who want to see fair and honest outcomes for all concerned and not just satisfy the demands of select groups, minorities and lobbyists."

Answer- The general spirit is interesting.

There are a few democratic principles that seem relevant-
Government of the people, by the people, for the people- ie no disproportionate influence by lobby groups. But could use group leadership to represent group interest. The best way to ensure that the interests of people are served is to give them the power over their domain. In the case of complex group interests give them proportional power- even the ideal benevolent dictator is harmful.
Government levels should reflect the natural cultures that have developed over hundreds and thousands of years- for stability- different cultures have different principles- if different cultures mix someone needs to give up their principles. If someone lives, trades, etc in another cultures land they need to fit in with the host culture and not try to dominate the culture for peaces sake. Local communities need to be able to manage their borders for the principle of "self determination". The different levels of government need to reflect the natural cadence of people- individual, family, street, local shopping district, city, state, nation, region, world. Each of these levels have the right to self determination to thrive or decline based on their good or bad management. You wouldn't want to arbitrarily damage or reduce participation by particular groups except in the case that the groups seek to damage the community. A captured army added to an army increases its strength but needs to be aware of insurrection. There have been numerous cases breeding programs throughout history to remove certain cultures. There have been insurrection within cultures- stable cultures need to have ways of managing insurrection within their ranks. Reform is tolerated- with a majority- soft power- not revolution. A sign of insurrection- unrepresentative power, laws. The majority should try to find ways to meet minority needs if they can without undermining the rights of the majority.

The average voters have to take a good look at themselves too. Let's face it the average voters & particularly in Australia are highly opportunistic. How many do really care about the Nation other than from what they can get for themselves, no matter how others are faring.
We have the evidence on forums so there's no point in wasting time trying to deny it.
Voters need to look up integrity & what it means & does.
So, don't criticise a leader when you're no better or even worse of character yourself. Hypocrisy is a dreadful trait & going by the content of of many comments it's already replaced decency by 2:1. The most capable captain can't run a ship with an indisciplined crew.